LAUREN DISALVO
Plaster Cast Collections from the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition
in Context: Examining Culturally Determined Significance through
Environment and Time
Résumé
Abstract
Plaster casts occupy a suspended position between
original works of art and reproductions. Although
used both in antiquity and the early Renaissance,
this humble material was embraced in the 19th
century for its promising capabilities to replicate
antique statues with precision. In America,
during the second half of the 19th century, cast
collecting became an extremely prevalent practice
both in private and public realms. In the public
sphere, plaster casts in museums were not only
valued for their civilizing effects but also afforded
Americans a unique opportunity to view a more
complete canon of antique sculpture. Since
museums were associated with most colleges and
universities by the end of the 19th century, plaster
casts also took on a critical role in archaeological
pedagogy.
The meanings generated by plaster casts
were in no way fixed or singular; according to
anthropologist and art historian Christopher
Pinney, objects have the ability to “migrate endlessly, cutting back and forth across new times
and contexts” (2004: 206). Plaster casts inherently
do this through their temporal references to the
original statues that they replicate. In fact, art
historian Michael Camille’s work on the power
of medieval plaster casts suggests that the process
of replication facilitates the objects’ ability to take
on new meanings (1996: 199). The changing
classifications and displays of plaster casts further
multiply their associative functions. In this essay,
I will establish the function and specific cultural
meanings of two collections of classical plaster
casts that first appeared at the 1904 Louisiana
Purchase Exposition in St. Louis, Missouri. It
is not my intention to unpack specific meanings
behind every subject choice or iconographic
theme of the specific collections but rather to
En examinant deux ensembles de moulages de plâtre
classiques dont la vie a commencé lors de l’Exposition
universelle de 1904 à Saint-Louis, je retracerai la
manière dont l’espace, le contexte et le temps ont instauré
la fonction, les significations culturelles particulières et
l’authenticité de ces moulages. Indépendamment du fait
que ces collections sont apparues dans un environnement
similaire, elles ont été adaptées à différents usages
culturels et intentions, et leurs mouvements dans
différents environnements et à travers le temps leur
ont fait acquérir de multiples niveaux de signification
culturelle.
Through an exploration of the lives of two sets of
classical plaster casts that began at the 1904 Louisiana
Purchase Exposition in St. Louis, I will track how
space, context, and time established the function, specific
cultural meanings, and authenticity of these casts.
Regardless of the fact that these collections began in a
similar environment, they were adapted for different
cultural uses and agendas and accrued multiple levels
of cultural significance in their movements through
different environments and through time.
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 131
Fig. 1
August Gerber’s busts
of Prussian leaders in
the Main Hall of the
German State Building
(Gerber 1910: 85).
cursorily examine the range of meanings evoked
by these collections.
Because of the nature of my argument, this
essay will be organized into fair and post-fair
functions of the cast collections, examining the
changing scope of authenticity, functions, and
meanings of the casts. I will look to primary
sources to reflect how associations with genuineness and legitimacy were implied when artists,
collectors, and viewers referenced craftsmanship
and colour when evaluating the casts’ quality
and historical accuracy. I will then demonstrate
how the criteria used to judge plaster casts was
in flux by the turn of the century in America and
how these criteria highlighted tensions present
between the fine arts and mass production, as
demonstrated by the fluidity in meaning and
function of plaster casts. I will point to conceptions of authenticity as they begin to emerge
in relation to the collections of plaster casts
specifically. While the term was absent at the
turn of the century, it gained currency later in
the 20th century as a criterion of judgment and
complicated how plaster casts were received.1
Additionally, I will contextualize these collections
in time, examining how their cultural meanings
and functions have changed since their formation
and their recent resurgence as valued artifacts by
their institutional owners. Ultimately, I contend
that a single plaster cast communicates many
132 truths, underscoring how their flexible conceptions of function and authenticity become fixed
by the specific environments in which they
were—and are—received and understood.
1904 Fair Functions
While collected casts were displayed in a myriad
of venues, one of the most formative moments in
cast collecting, for the purposes of this essay, was
at the Great Exhibition in the Crystal Palace in
1851 in Hyde Park, London. The plaster casts
of ancient statues were divided into displays of
different periods, Greek and Roman, Gothic and
Renaissance, modern Italian and French, and
modern English and German sculpture, and these
groupings enabled comparison. The “Prospectus
of the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of
1851” announced: “The French, Germans, and
Italians will cease to be the only European nations
busy in educating the eye of the people for the appreciation of art and beauty” (Kenworthy-Browne
2006: 174). This attitude foreshadows the wave
of nationalism that also arose in connection with
casts at American world fairs.
World fairs in America were sites of contact
with large crowds and as such they readily lent
themselves to the dissemination of knowledge.
They worked to shape public taste of the masses
through overwhelming exhibitions, static or
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
Fig. 2
August Gerber’s plaster
casts present in the
German University
exhibit in the Palace of
Education. His cast of
Athena Lemnia is at the
centre of the exhibit with
busts of noted Germans
around the perimetre
(Gerber 1907: 118).
living, of anything from technology to art. In
fact, fair buildings, filled with exhibits, were
strikingly similar to museums themselves (Harris
1990: 114-20).2 While the functions of world
fairs were multivalent, serving as anything from
an anthropological field research station to an
imperial dream city, the fair’s importance as a
locus for didacticism and nationalism will be
particularly pertinent for this essay.3 Indeed, the
1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition, celebrating the westward expansion of America, took
on the central theme of the “University of the
Future.” The president of the exposition, David
R. Francis, believed that fairs should display
only the highest products from industry, art, and
science (Parezo and Fowler 2007: 19, 32). This
essay will investigate how plaster casts at the fair
reflected these goals.
August Gerber at the 1904 Exposition
August Gerber, a celebrated German plaster
caster from Cologne, Germany, displayed his casts
at the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition and
promoted them as both celebrations of German
nationalism and educational objects. Gerber
displayed just fewer than two hundred ancient,
modern, and Italian and German medieval casts
across various palaces at the world fair.
Nationalistic Functions
The variety of locations at which Gerber’s casts
were exhibited at the fair contributed to the
importance of the casts in Germany’s celebration of its national identity. Gerber’s casts were
on view in the German State Building, Palace
of Education, Palace of Varied Industries, and,
most prominently, in the Palace of Liberal Arts
(Gerber 1904: 9, 18). Germany was, in fact, the
centre of the plaster cast movement in Europe
and thus it is logical that it would promote
this strength with one of its most successful
cast makers (Nichols 2006: 117).4 The rise of
nationalism during the 19th century fostered an
ideal environment for museums and cast makers
alike to promote their national heritage and to
push for national art production (Frederiksen and
Marchand 2010: 7). In considering their context
in a building specifically dedicated to Germany
and their commission by the state, it becomes
clear that the casts in the German State Building
were especially evocative of this nationalism and
celebrated the nation through their subject matter: they represented leaders, scholars, musicians,
orators, champions of liberty, and scientists who
appropriately illustrated the achievements of the
German people (Fig. 1). Gerber’s plaster busts
of notable Germans, such as Winckelmann
and Goethe, placed in the German Educational
Exhibit, promoted the importance of Germany
in the fields of art history and classical studies
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 133
(Fig. 2; Gerber 1904: 8). Thus, the context of
these casts demanded a nationalistic spirit advancing the nation of Germany and the German
educational system.
The casts also championed Germany
through their materiality and manufacture since
they embodied exquisite craftsmanship and
archaeological accuracy as claimed by Gerber
himself in his catalogue (1904: 21-23). At the
very centre of the German University Exhibit
stood Gerber’s cast of Athena Lemnia, which
served as the axis around which the other exhibits
rotated. Its central position represents the great
importance of classics and antiquity in general
to the university exhibit (1904: 23-40). Also, the
original statue from which the cast of Athena
Lemnia was taken was in fact a reconstruction,
pieced together by the German archaeologist
and art historian, Adolf Furtwängler.5 Again,
displaying this cast of Furtwängler’s reconstruction boasted of German scholarship and lent
legitimacy to the statue. Therefore, the cast of
Athena Lemnia highlighted interests in promoting German involvement not only in classical
archaeology but also in art history.
Colour as Didactic and a Marker of Accuracy
The ways in which August Gerber focused on
the materiality and, specifically, the colour of the
casts, contributed to their perception as accurate
art objects and enhanced their educational value.
Although plaster casts traditionally remained
white in order to facilitate comparison, Gerber
went against this trend, stating that his were
toned, bronzed, or painted in accordance with
the original to ensure that the viewer received a
correct impression of the work (Gerber 1904: 8).6
Gerber believed that colour would lead to a better
understanding of classical art: “All these casts ...
enable one to understand the different kinds of
classical art, as white casts cannot possibly do”
(Gerber 1904: 17). This assertion would explain
why Gerber put so much effort into ensuring
that he portrayed the original colours of works
of art. In fact, in regard to his bronze-coloured
casts, Gerber claimed, “the artistic imitation is
so perfect that any one without touching the
sculpture would believe it to be nothing less than
real metal” (Gerber 1904: 17). In this concern
134 with reception, Gerber revealed that he was
interested not only in dictating that the viewers
see his casts as works of accurate art but also in
ensuring the didactic role of his casts.
Perhaps the most significant demonstration
of colour as a tool of accuracy is demonstrated
by the way in which Gerber chose to produce
the cast of Athena Lemnia, essentially creating
a new work of art (Fig. 2). Although the original
sculpture was made of marble, Gerber coloured it
as antique bronze, referring to the original Greek,
bronze Athena of Lemnos that Phidias was
believed to have made instead of the Roman copy
as reconstructed by Furtwängler (Gerber 1904:
8). In this way, Gerber suggested that his cast
was even more accurate than the sculpture from
which it was moulded. His bronze would evoke
the ultimate original copy of Phidias, changing
the meaning of the cast through temporal
references. During this period, plaster casts were
not always coloured. In fact, it was thought that
colour might divert from the actual form of the
sculpture. Therefore, art educators and teachers
generally preferred the whiteness of the casts
(Van Rheeden 2001: 220-21). This preference
suggests that Gerber was not falling in with a
trend to colour the casts but was colouring them
in order to promote his vision of referring to the
statue from which the mould came.
The way in which Gerber coloured Athena
Lemnia was not a singular example as is noted
by the way in which he addressed colour in his
1904 catalogue of his exhibit. Gerber listed the
works, not necessarily by their original material,
but by the “material” in which he coloured them.
For example, he also championed the original
Greek medium and not the surviving Roman
marble copy in his listing for the Apoxyomenos,
which is as follows: “Statue APOXYOMENOS,
Vatican, Rome, bronze” (Gerber 1904: 11) (Fig.
3). In this way, Gerber continually suggested that
his plaster copies were more original than the
original copy of the statue on which it was based.
August Gerber and Education
One of the primary aims of the firm of August
Gerber was to supply plaster casts for educative
purposes, an aim that was supported by their
display within the German Educational Exhibit.
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
Here, the exhibitions of casts, reflecting the
influence of both Gerber and the government,
demonstrate fluidity in function. These exhibits
were very select and designed with the purpose
to exhibit items with which North American
educators had limited familiarity (Gerber 1904:
5). Furthermore, Gerber was perhaps more
interested in disseminating his casts and in
their educative and nationalistic values than in
financial gains since he provided his casts free of
charge to the German State Building. However,
this is the only venue in which it can be proven
that he definitively donated the casts, and his
motivations behind the donation might simply
reflect a desire to advertise.
Gerber’s plaster casts displayed in the
German University Exhibit of the Palace of
Education were in accordance with the German
educational exhibit’s mission to educate visitors
about the accomplishments of the Empire’s
universities. Since the section of the exhibit of the
universities was limited, the exhibitors decided
to “include things belonging to the last ten years
and arousing more than a local interest” (1904: iii,
vi-vii, 45). Gerber considered his casts instructive,
stating that both students and the general public
would be interested in “collections of artistic
casts made up in this manner” (Gerber 1904: 17).
These casts included busts of noted Germans and
the Athena Lemnia statue and would thus be
instructive in the history of German scholarship.
Gerber’s casts were promoted instead as
aesthetic artworks in the Classical Gymnasium
Exhibit devoted to the German school based
primarily on the classical literature of the ancient
Greeks and Romans (Bahlsen 1904: 6). The casts
were described as “artistic wall decorations” and
comprised ancient and medieval statues as well
as an assortment of classical and modern busts
of noted writers and philosophers (Bahlsen 1904:
iv-v). The purpose of the wall decorations was “to
educate the taste and esthetic feeling of young
people rather than to influence their intellects or
enlarge their knowledge” (Bahlsen 1904: v). So
while these plaster casts had a didactic function,
it was not to teach students the history of art as in
the university exhibit but rather to promote taste,
much like plaster casts were to civilize the general
public. Gerber even claimed that his prices did
not reflect that of a monopoly, but rather could
be afforded by rich and poor institutions alike,
allowing for all to cultivate artistic sense and good
taste (Gerber 1910: 11). This claim highlights the
role that casts played in the world at large as a tool
to refine and cultivate taste in educative settings.
However, Gerber’s exhibits in the Palace of
Education were not the only ones that revealed
his didactic interests. Gerber’s attitude toward
his exhibits in the Palace of Liberal Arts indicate
Fig. 3
August Gerber’s plaster
casts of Antique Art in
the Palace of Liberal
Arts. Note the plaster
cast of the Apoxyomenos
colored bronze next to
the cast of Artemis of
Gabii (Gerber 1907:
119).
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 135
that they served as accurate objects to educate
the public in the history of art—not just in
aesthetic appreciation. In the Palace of Liberal
Arts the casts were grouped into Sculptures of
Antique Art, Sculptures of the Italian Middle
Age, Sculptures of the German Middle Age
and Sculptures of Modern Art, following the
typical classification systems used in textbooks
of ancient sculpture and art at the time, such as
the sculptures in the Portico of the Fine Arts
Palace representing the great periods of art.
This presentation as works of art, rather than
as ornamental elements in an environment, and
classification according to culture and chronology,
would suggest that they were being treated as if
genuine objects in a museum and would therefore
necessitate their viewing as legitimate artworks.
Indeed, their very presence in the Palace of
Liberal Arts, celebrating artistic achievements,
required the casts to be viewed as such.
August Gerber’s casts at the fair demonstrate
how important context and environment can
be when determining the agenda and artistic
quality of the collection. Even within Gerber’s
largely didactic collection of casts, meaning was
nuanced in relation to their different locations at
the fair. Casts in the German Building promoted
nationalism; in the Palace of Education they
promulgated the importance of learning; and
the casts located in the Palace of Liberal Arts
demanded treatment as works of art.
The United States National Museum at
the 1904 Exposition
Unlike August Gerber’s exhibits located primarily in the Palace of Fine Arts and Palace of
Education, the United States National Museum’s
(USNM) plaster cast display, created by the Old
World Archaeology directors Cyrus Adler and
Immanuel Casanowicz, was created specifically for the Smithsonian Institution exhibit in
the U.S. Government Building at the 1904
Louisiana Purchase Exposition. The display
was on a considerably smaller scale consisting of
fewer than fifty plaster casts taken from original
Assyrian, Egyptian, Greek, and Roman statues
and arranged by culture. Like the classical plaster
casts that were part of Gerber’s exhibitions,
the USNM collection was didactic in nature
136 but focused on instructing fairgoers about the
aesthetic achievements of humankind, including
those of the indigenous Americas, as opposed to
the history of Western art. The casts of ancient
artworks were promoted as accurate in order
to further the USNM’s objective of promoting
Mesoamerican and Native American Indian
objects as genuine works of art. These meanings
were determined directly by the indigenous casts
and artifacts displayed in conjunction with the
classical plaster casts.
Themes and Goals of the Exhibit
According to the secretary of the Smithsonian
Institution, G. Brown Goode, the USNM became
involved in expositions in order to educate
American visitors and impress foreign ones and
he stated that “all of this is accepted without complaint, because though the Museum undoubtedly
loses much more than it gains on such occasions,
the opportunity for popular education is too
important to be neglected” (SIA, Record Unit
[RU] 55, box 19, folder 9). Numerous agencies,
including the Louisiana Purchase Exposition,
the Division of Anthropology and the USNM,
dictated the subject and theme of the exhibit.
The plaster casts fell in line with the educative
themes of the exposition and its mission to educate visitors about the pinnacle of humankind’s
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
Fig. 4
Plaster casts exhibited as
part of the Department
of Anthropology
display in the U.S.
Government Building.
The classical plaster
casts are displayed by
culture on the left. To
the right, divided by
a narrow walkway,
are the plaster cast
temples and sculptures
of Mesoamerica and the
Native Americans (SIA
Image #2009-2212).
achievements by promoting Mesoamerican and
North American Indian works as art.
The Department of Anthropology’s exhibit
within the USNM also adhered to the goals of
the Division of Anthropology, an entity at the
fair that was located on the opposite side of the
fairgrounds from the U.S. Government Building.
William J. McGee, the chair of the Division of
Anthropology, asserted that these exhibits should
trace the course of human progress (Parezo and
Fowler 2007: 49). By including both indigenous
and European works, the exhibit undoubtedly
achieved this goal.
The classical plaster casts, arranged according to culture, were only one segment of the
Department of Anthropology’s exhibit in the
USNM’s space in the U.S. Government building
(Fig. 4). The remaining portion of the exhibit
included Mesoamerican and North American
Indian artifacts and plaster casts.7 During preparations for the fair, one of the organizers described
the exhibit’s goals as “covering the entire range
of arts and manufactures of the Native American
peoples, so selected as to illustrate their artistic
or esthetic development; the specimens chosen
in each case to be the best examples of their
kind” (NAA, Holmes to F. W. True, December
16, 1902, outgoing correspondence, BAE, 1902).
The director of the Department of Anthropology,
William Henry Holmes, stated of the exhibit: “I
hope to make this extremely attractive, since it
will bring together examples of the best work,
the finest carvings, paintings, sculptures, etc.,
found in America” (SIA, RU 70, box 62, folder
16, November 16, 1902, letter from Holmes to
F. W. True). Therefore, selecting only the best and
most aesthetically pleasing works of indigenous
art advanced the art of the Americas as well as
inherently presented an evolutionary model in
comparison with the casts.
The classical plaster casts ultimately evoked
a comparison with the indigenous works of the
Americas. The final anthropology exhibit as
described by the USNM was as follows: “The
theme was to show the aesthetic achievements
of the Native American peoples. In conjunction
with this was shown some of the works of art of
ancient civilizations of the old world” (SIA, RU
70, box 70, folder 3). In this comparative context
then, it was critical that the plaster casts were
seen as works of art that then worked to promote
the indigenous arts of the Americas to a similar
status. Despite the fact that the plaster casts as a
whole were divided from the Mesoamerican and
North American artifacts by means of a narrow
walkway, they were still connected to one another
through their materiality. In addition to plaster
casts of indigenous sculpture, there were also
plaster architectural models that were especially
commissioned for this exhibit and would have
been clearly visible from the classical plaster
cast section. This section included models of
the Temple Xochicalco, the Temple Hall of the
Columns, the Temple of the Cross, the House
of the Governor in Uxmal and the Castillo and
presented the most comprehensive display of
Native American architecture seen in a public
exhibition (SIA, RU 70, box 70, folder 1: Report
on Exhibits of the Department of Anthropology
and the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1905).
Even more blatant was the incorporation of
two pieces of indigenous pottery on top of the
screens dividing the classical plaster casts (Fig. 4).
Therefore, regardless of the fact that the casts and
indigenous artifacts were not intermingled, they
were clearly intended to reference one another.
Although archaeological and ethnographic
materials often coexisted with the rationale that
classical study was incomplete without including
more medieval studies, and thus encouraged
an evolutionary model, I would argue for their
primacy as artworks. In fact, it was necessary that
the plaster casts be regarded as accurate artworks
in order to present the Mesoamerican and North
American ethnographic materials and artifacts,
some of them the very same medium of plaster, as
aesthetically valuable artworks (Beard 1993: 4).8
Casts Promoted as Artworks
The classical plaster casts that were specifically
chosen and organized by Adler and Casanowicz
demonstrate concerns with accuracy. The fact
that they obtained “original casts” directly
from museums and distinguished cast makers
suggested that they were high-quality casts and
thus made certain that they were historically
accurate works of art.9 The cast of the head of
the Diskobolos is unique in this collection of
plaster casts because its original label survives,
describing the work as a “cast of a marble copy in
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 137
the Lancalotti Palace, Rome.” This label suggests
that Adler was making the viewer aware of its
reproductive status and was not as concerned
with its originality, demonstrating the tensions
that exist in plaster casts. Since Adler sought to
promote Native American art through its correlation to canonical works, only the casts’ reference
to the original was important. Its association
with the original enhanced the status of the
American artifacts displayed in conjunction with
it, essentially reclassifying these ethnographic
objects as works of art.
Anomalously included with the Egyptian
casts was an “original” Roman portrait. Adler
pushed for the purchase of this portrait because,
according to a letter he wrote, this was a sort of
painting that was “not known to exist … until
a few years ago, when a collection was found in
Upper Egypt.” He continues,
this collection is the only one known and is
probably 2000 years old. I was very anxious to
have a specimen of this lost art in the exhibition, as being something rare and unique and
illustrating one important phase in the history
of the arts. (SIA, RU 70, box 61, Adler to
Ravenel, Aug. 4, 1904)
The importance of this portrait is further attested by the fact that Adler originally wished
to purchase two encaustic portraits, but was only
able to afford to purchase one (SIA, RU 70, box
71, folder 4; MSC, accession record no. 43048).
Although this piece stands out because it was the
only non-plaster cast material exhibited, I would
argue that its medium was acceptable because its
value as a work of art far exceeded the need for
it to be sculptural in form. As Adler stated, this
was a recently discovered art form, at least to
the USNM, and thus it placed the Department
of Anthropology within the current developments of the art world, again emphasizing the
importance of aesthetics. I would suggest that
the portrait, out of all the “real” classical artifacts
the USNM was in possession of at this time, was
purchased and displayed because of its status as a
newly discovered art form, which indicated that
the plaster casts were also chosen for their artistic
merit and educational functions. The plaster
casts might also be regarded as genuine artistic
works despite the fact that the encaustic portrait
displayed alongside the reproductions blatantly
questioned their legitimacy. In this context, then,
138 the plaster casts and encaustic portrait lent each
other artistic accuracy and signified the difficulty
of attaching any fixed meaning to the plaster
casts.
Casts as Symbols of Art and Empire
A series of Roman reliefs from the Arch of
Trajan at Benevento symbolize the USNM’s
struggle to promote the objects in their exhibits
as both works of art and of empire. The casts
were acquired from The American School of
Classical Studies in Rome and were not originally
slotted for the exhibit. When first investigating
plaster casts, H. Langley, the secretary of the
Smithsonian Institution, wished to instead
obtain a cast section of the Column of Trajan
for the centre of the Rotunda, adjacent to the
department’s exhibit. Not only was the column
symbolic of the height of ancient art in Rome,
but it also spoke to the height of the Roman
Empire and Roman imperial power. In a letter,
Langley wrote, “I want to have it in evidence
that the Museum exists for art as well as for
science, and such a thing as this column is a
most suggestive reminder” (MSC, accession
record No. 42866). The Column of Trajan, then,
was intended to promote the USNM as an art
institution as well as a place of natural history
and science. In addition, Langley asserted that
while world fairs commonly used European
art to show an evolution of humankind, this
particular exhibit was more concerned with the
idea of “art” than evolution. Since the museum
was unable to acquire the piece, the Smithsonian
Institution decided to commission a local plaster
artist to make a Goddess of Liberty instead for the
rotunda.10
Nonetheless, the USNM purchased another
piece of architectural sculpture from the reign
of Trajan for the amount of $316, the greatest
amount the department spent on a single group
of casts from the same monument, signifying
the enormous importance of the reliefs (MSC,
Accession record 42866, LPX Order #459). By
displaying these reliefs, the USNM promoted
a comparison with the indigenous American
objects in the exhibit that incidentally also
highlighted the tensions between the evolutionary model and the objects as works of art. This
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
comparison was further facilitated by the fact
that the Arch of Trajan relief panels spoke highly
to empire, emphasized especially by the ways in
which the plaster casts were divided into cultural
empires. The cast relief of the personification of
Mesopotamia on bended knee before Trajan is
particularly jarring since this scene of submission, in relation to the indigenous plaster casts
displayed nearby, implies that the Department of
Anthropology was referencing empire-building.
This may indirectly relate to the empire-building
of the Mesoamerican cultures whose art, including casts of deities and rulers, was displayed
nearby, thus drawing a comparison between
the two (SIA, RU 70, box 79, folder 1, Report
of the Department of Anthropology, 1905 by
Holmes, 31). If the cast of Mesopotamia was
an allusion to empire-building, the relief would
then also resonate with the greater exposition at
St. Louis itself, since it was in celebration of the
acquisition of the Louisiana Purchase and the
possibility of an American empire. The fact that
they chose another victory monument from the
reign of Trajan signifies the USNM’s interests
in connecting old and new world archaeology
through empire and the displaying of art with
themes of conquest.
The plaster casts present at the USNM’s
exhibit at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition
were utilized to represent the primary concern of
the Department of Anthropology in displaying
ideal ancient works of art, embodying some of
the greatest civilizations of the past, in order to
promote indigenous objects as valid works of art.
The department’s primary interests are further
evidenced by the fact that at the following and
smaller 1905 Lewis and Clark Centennial in
Portland, Holmes chose only to send the Mayan
plaster model temples, which were considered the
most striking objects from the exhibit (SIA, RU
70, box 65, folder 10; SIA, RU 70, box 70, folder
3). The long-validated standing of the classical
casts displayed in this exhibit served to augment
the status of the anthropological collections and
place them also within the realm of acceptable
art. In order for this to be accomplished, it was
critical that the plaster casts were seen as genuine
works of art themselves. It was this specific
context within indigenous art and artifacts that
mandated that these casts be viewed as artworks.
This exhibit reveals the ability of plaster casts to
accrue multiple levels of significance: asserting
the casts as artworks, promoting indigenous,
ethnographic materials as works of art, paralleling
the idea of evolution in the Americas and Europe,
and stressing the similarity of empire-building.
By exhibiting these plaster casts at the 1904
Louisiana Purchase Exposition, the USNM
was appealing to the public for this change
in the discourse of Mesoamerican and North
American art.
Post-Fair Functions
In this section of the essay, I will introduce how
the term “authenticity” complicates the discourse
around plaster casts, as can be demonstrated by
the infamous “Battle of the Casts” at the Museum
of Fine Arts (MFA) in Boston. Interestingly, this
public battle took place at the same time as the
1904 fair, demonstrating the flux in the reception
of plaster casts at the turn of the century. The
museum, originally founded as an educational
platform, became sacralized over time, placing
primacy with aesthetics. The argument between
Edward Robinson, the director and curator of
ancient art at the MFA, and Matthew Prichard,
the assistant director at the MFA, began with a
proposition to move the plaster casts into a new
building away from the authentic art objects.
Prichard saw true, aesthetic beauty only in
originals, while Robinson supported the plaster
casts and their didactic uses. In the end, the
plaster casts were moved to storage, Prichard lost
his job, and Robinson resigned (DiMaggio 1982:
36; Wallach 1998: 56). Thus, during this time
period, plaster casts were being removed from
museums as they were increasingly considered
inauthentic.11 This battle embodies the ways in
which authenticity and the cult of the original
began to shape the fate of plaster casts.
One of the major, although by no means
singular, causes for the decline in plaster casts
was the idea of the cult of the original that
began taking root in the 1880s and 1890s. The
idea of authenticity began to emerge and assert
itself as a defining factor in the valuation of art.12
Museums saw themselves as a temple of the
arts that only housed objects of high aesthetic
taste. Consequently, even third-rate “original”
objects took precedence over a reproduction of
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 139
a canonical work. Casts were viewed as mere
mechanical reproductions and their very presence
among authentic artworks was seen as degrading
to the originals.13 Increasingly, the museum
experience moved away from the strict moral and
intellectual refinement of the public and turned
to aesthetics.14
The post-fair relocations of the Gerber and
USNM collections demonstrate the fluidity of
meaning surrounding the reception of casts at the
turn of the century. This simultaneous embrace
and disapproval of the plaster cast relays the
transitory nature of this period and dictates a
more pluralistic approach to art.15
The Gerber Collection
Acquisition and Reception of Casts
The fate of August Gerber’s casts demonstrates
the very fact that amidst this ongoing debate between the authentic and the reproduction, plaster
casts still could retain value as educational tools.
Gerber’s plaster casts specifically targeted educative venues, as is evidenced by the plaster cast
collection at Southeast Missouri State University,
located in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, which
was purchased in 1904 directly from Gerber at
the Louisiana Purchase Exposition. Mr. Louis
Houck was a member of the Board of Regents
at the State Normal School in Cape Girardeau
who, while visiting the fair, became especially
interested in the German exhibit of plaster casts
and made an offer to take some of them back
with him to the Cape Girardeau Normal School,
now called Southeast Missouri State University
(Mattingly 1979: 100). Mr. Houck corresponded
with both August Gerber and the president of
the Normal School, Washington Dearmount,
and eventually purchased the plaster casts for
$1,888.25 on October 19, 1904. All of the plaster
casts purchased by Houck, except for several from
the Palace of Education exhibits, came from
Gerber’s main exhibit at the Palace of Liberal
Arts, which might suggest that Houck was more
interested in establishing a history of art than one
of art appreciation.
140 The academic community of Cape Girardeau
heralded the arrival of the plaster casts. On
October 25, 1904, President Dearmount at the
Normal School declared the fifty-eight plaster
casts from the world fair had won first prize
and a gold medal at the fair (SEMO, President’s
Office Subject Files, box 1335, file 11). In the
local paper the collection was described as “a collection of statuary that for its kind is not excelled
or even equaled by any school in the country”
(Cape Girardeau Democrat, December 24, 1904).
Dearmount himself stated that the casts were
“much superior to any casts that [he] ha[d] ever
seen” (SEMO, President’s Office Subject Files,
box 1335, file 11, June 12, 1905, Letter from the
President of the Faculty). These primary sources
designate accuracy and artistry as indicators of
value. Furthermore, the December 1904 Bulletin
of the State Normal School stated that all of the
plaster casts purchased for the Normal School
bore the label “Sold—Missouri State Normal
School, Cape Girardeau” (SEMO, Bulletin, State
Normal School, December, 1904). This label was
put on the plaster casts that were still on exhibit at
the fair, thus advertising the Normal School and
their participation in the classical tradition as well
as the availability of Gerber’s casts for purchase.
After arriving in Cape Girardeau, the plaster
casts were slated for exhibit in Academic Hall’s
main corridor under the advisement of August
Gerber. In fact, Gerber’s overseeing the installation of the casts was actually a stipulation of
his contract (SEMO, President’s Office Subject
Files, box 1335, file 11, June 12, 1905, Letter
from the President of the Faculty).16 I would
suggest that this is not only an indication of
his dedication to the educative nature of plaster
casts but also of a certain devotion to his awardwinning artistic works. In March of 1905 the
plaster casts were exhibited in the west end of the
main corridor of the new Academic Hall, as per
Houck’s stipulation that a room where they could
be permanently displayed would be dedicated
to them (Fig. 5). These casts certainly proved
applicable to the school’s mission to train students
to become public school teachers (Mattingly
1979: 71; SEMO, Bulletin of the Missouri State
Normal School, Catalogue, 1904: 5).
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
Fig. 5
The plaster casts,
purchased by Louis
Houck, displayed in
the Main Hall of
Academic Hall at the
State Normal School
in Cape Girardeau,
Missouri. “Statuary in
Academic Hall, Cape
Girardeau Normal
School, ca. 1910,”
University Photographs
Collection, Special
Collections and Archives,
Southeast Missouri State
University.
Casts as Didactic
The casts properly fit within the languageconcentrated curriculum of the school, and the
school’s dedication to the field of classical study
is demonstrated by the fact that it had an entire
path of study devoted to Latin. In fact, during
the presidency of Dearmount there were three
courses of study: a one-year Common School
or sub-Normal course, and the four-year Latin
and English courses. In conjunction with both
the Latin and English courses, students studied
free-hand drawing, ancient, medieval, and modern history (SEMO, President’s Office Subject
Files, box 1251, file 5, Courses of Instruction).
The ancient history class spent two-thirds of its
term discussing Greek and Roman history, and
all three of its textbooks were devoted to the
same subjects (SEMO, Bulletin of the Missouri
State Normal School, Catalogue, 1904: 23). As was
common in education at the time, it is extremely
likely that this subject, in addition to the drawing
courses, would have made use of the plaster casts.
Further evidence of the collection’s being used
for didactic purposes is the care of selection that
denotes a truly comprehensive collection including casts from antiquity, the German and Italian
Middle Ages, and Modern periods.
I would suggest that the placement of the
plaster casts in Academic Hall, the academic
heart of the school at that point, as well as the
community and school’s pride in these works,
dictated that they be viewed as both artworks
and valuable tools in education. The way in
which reports of these casts emphasized their
value and award-winning status would suggest
that they were regarded as accurate, especially
in consideration of the plaster casts’ value to the
school as one that esteemed a classical education.
In this environment, the casts took on a more
authoritative educative role and allowed SEMO
to participate in classical education trends at
universities throughout the United States.
Dispersal and Neglect
As plaster casts were increasingly viewed with
more hostility, the educators’ utilization of the
casts likely decreased in the 1920s in conjunction
with changing policies of the school, including
changes in curriculum that did not as heavily
favour the classics. Despite this, casts remained
in the Academic Hall until 1959, when they
were dispersed throughout campus to make
room for additional classroom space. The year
prior, the university had formed a committee to
determine the distribution of the plaster casts and
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 141
whose aim was to allow the works to continue
to serve as tools of learning for the students,
rather than to go into storage (Crow 1975).
However, their usefulness in didactic situations
as individual units, rather than as a collection,
should be questioned. Despite these intentions, it
was lamented that all the labels from the plaster
casts were no longer present, further removing the
objects from being considered genuine or having
educational value. Additionally, many of the casts
fell into disrepair during this period of dispersal
across campus. Although the casts remained in
situ, it was likely out of convenience more than
anything else, as their disposability was readily
demonstrated when the space was needed for
another purpose.
United States National Museum Collection
The ways in which context dictates meaning
is well illustrated by the fate of the casts from
the 1904 world fair exhibit of the United States
National Museum, now called the National
Museum of Natural History (NMNH). The
plaster casts have remained with the NMNH
since their exhibition at the fair despite the
diffusion of the USNM into different divisions
within the Smithsonian Institution. Although
the casts have remained in the collections, they
appear to have never been utilized as they were
at the fair, only being exhibited again once more
in 1922 under the direction of Casanowicz.
1922 Exhibit
When Casanowicz displayed the plaster casts
from the fair eighteen years later, a seismic shift
in attitudes toward plaster casts had taken shape.
Again, despite tensions between the authentic
and the copy, the Old World Archaeology
department still utilized the plaster casts,
although it is difficult to determine whether they
had any pedagogical purpose. In Casanowicz’s
1922 exhibit a large number of plaster casts
were displayed along with genuine, classical
artifacts (Casanowicz 1924: 445). Simulacra,
in addition to those casts at the 1904 fair, such
as casts, models, and electrotyped gems were
included in the exhibit along with “real” classical
objects, including pottery, jewelry, and bronzes
(Casanowicz 1924: 490-96). The catalogue of the
142 exhibit states that all artifacts from the classical
world that the museum owned at the time were
displayed along with other Old World artifacts.
I would suggest that this context within an
amalgamation of authentic artifacts attests more
to the sheer amount of material that the museum
owned and therefore functioned more as a signal
of the breadth of collection than for any strict
pedagogical purpose. In fact, the Smithsonian
actively collected exhibition material from world
fairs to help prove to Congress that they required
more museum space (Rydell 2006: 137-38). After
this 1922 exhibit ended, the plaster casts were put
into storage, where they still remain.
Cast into Storage
The life of the plaster casts after the 1922
exhibit at the NMNH illustrates how resilient,
or perhaps how easily forgotten, these plaster
casts are. All of the plaster casts from the initial
exhibit are still present; the only missing casts
were destroyed because of damage that was
beyond repair. The first location was a storage
site in Alexandria, Virginia, where facilities were
not ideal and resulted in crates being stacked one
on top of another, likely explaining the current
damage to some of the casts. The casts remained
here until 1972 when they were moved to the
Museum Support Center in Suitland, Maryland,
where the objects are all now in premium storage
crates individually catered to the size and shape
of the plaster casts. The fact that these casts not
only survived the tumultuous downfall of casts
but were also deemed worthy to move to the new
storage place in Suitland is indicative of their
importance. However, tensions are still present
because, although the casts are still physically
present, they remain hidden from the general
public.
The Current State of Cast Collections
Revival of Casts
Despite the fact that many collections faced
storage, neglect, and destruction during the first
three quarters of the 20th century, the fates of
some plaster casts were spared with the revival
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
of casts that began in the 1970s and 1980s and
continues still today (Stone 1987: 33). The
resurgence really began to take shape after the
publication of Taste and the Antique: The Lure
of Classical Sculpture 1500-1900 by Haskell and
Penny in 1981 that brought further attention to
the rise in popularity of plaster casts that began
in the late 15th century (Nichols 2006: 119).
Following this renewal in interest, museums and
universities began once more to utilize their cast
collections.17 They were deemed valuable to both
university and public museums as didactic tools to
teach the history of art, mythology, and drawing.
Revival of the Gerber Collection
This type of revival is noted with the plaster
casts of August Gerber that ended up at the
State Normal School, now Southeast Missouri
State University. In 1975, the casts were again
put in the public eye by a front-page article in
the Southeast Missourian. The article bemoaned
the fate and destruction of some of the plaster
casts. Perhaps, then, it is not surprising that in the
following year, what thirty-eight casts remained
from the collection were gathered, restored,
and then transferred to the Southeast Missouri
Regional Museum by the director at the time,
James Parker. The casts remained in the museum
until it relocated and the decision was made not
to include the casts since the new museum would
focus on the archaeology, history, and fine arts of
the southeast Missouri region (Southeast State
Missouri University 2007). In 2007, The class of
1957 raised $100,000 dollars in order to have the
casts restored and moved to the new Aleen Vogel
Wehking Alumni Center, where they now line
the walls of an auditorium area (Fig. 6).
This exhibit of the plaster casts in the
Alumni Center has interesting implications in
terms of the reception of the objects. While no
longer in an authoritative museum setting that
lends the objects authenticity, the casts are still
promoted as significant. While most of the casts
are on the perimeter of the space and delimited
by a velvet rope that serves as a boundary for
visitors, the plaster busts that occupy the stage
of the auditorium effectively place the casts in
an authoritative role and position of prestige
within the space. In this auditorium environment, the function of the casts is to provide an
appropriate aura for a reception space rather than
any sort of overarching didactic purpose as they
had previously commanded in the university or
museum setting.
Stasis of USNM Casts
It is important to note that the collection of
classical plaster casts at the NMNH of the
Smithsonian Institution currently remains in
storage. It is perhaps unusual that a museum
of natural history would even have such a large
collection of plaster casts—around 150 total,
including casts that were also displayed at the
1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. The plaster
casts are large items and take up a great amount
of space in storage facilities, so it is intriguing
that they still persist in a natural history museum
with no curator in classical archaeology and few
formal connections to the field of art history. I
posit that this collection has survived the neglect
and destruction often sustained by casts in art
museum and university settings in the midcentury because they were in a natural history
museum where they essentially remained hidden
in plain view, on the whole spared from being
physically destroyed.
The context of a museum of natural history
provided an environment more embracing of
reproduction than an art museum. While there
are other artworks from the classical world in
storage along with the plaster casts, only several
are on exhibit in the Western Cultures Hall. In a
natural history museum, “real” objects and reproductions are regarded on a more equal level. In
the discipline of anthropology, reproductions are
not always viewed with the same stigma as they
might be in an art museum. In fact, taxidermy, an
exhibition practice originating from international
expositions and regularly featured in museums
of natural history, is a process of replication that
echoed the function of plaster casts as they stood
for the experience of the authentic and were
meant to be didactic (Wonders 1989: 131-42). A
simple keyword search of “cast” in the NMNH
artifact database comes back with about 2,500
results. Perhaps, then, the plaster casts of antique
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 143
Fig. 6
Plaster casts exhibited
in the Barbara Hope
Kem Statuary Hall of
the Aleen Vogel Wehking
Alumni Center at
Southeast Missouri State
University. Photo by
author.
subjects in the NMNH are valued as authentic
objects within the context of other reproductions
in a natural history museum and have thus been
retained.
Conclusions
The collections of the plaster casts of August
Gerber and those of the United States National
Museum of the Smithsonian Institution at the
1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition promoted
the didactic potential and artistic qualities of their
casts. However, their very different physical locations and environments commanded distinctions
in these meanings—Gerber promoted Germany
and education at the secondary and university
levels while the USNM strove to create a lineage
of purely “American” art. In their fair functions,
these casts were judged by historical accuracy,
quality, and materials in order to promote their
casts as accurate and legitimate art objects to
achieve their respective agendas.
After the fair, both collections went on to
serve distinctive purposes as well, although it is
144 during this time that authenticity was increasingly
associated with casts as a criterion of judgment.
The tumultuous nature of this period is noted in
these collections that were both utilized and cast
aside during this time. While the collections at
the NMNH might have existed in an extremely
static sense, their continued presence over a long
period of time reflects how the natural history
museum more welcomingly embraced replicas.
The casts now residing on SEMO’s campus
reflect the importance of temporality and larger
trends in relation to casts. Although utilized for
years as educational tools, the casts were neglected
and fell out of favour only to subsequently be
revived, echoing contemporary trends.
Tracing the entirety of the life histories of
these plaster cast collections reveals how the
passage of time and changing environments
directly determine meaning and the notions of
authenticity surrounding plaster casts. These cast
collections that were specifically created for the
1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition are now
objects that no longer serve a strictly functional
purpose. Overall, the current value of the two col-
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
lections does not lie in didacticism, but rather the
casts retain value as markers of cultural artifacts
with storied histories. Although these collections
of plaster casts often physically remain static, it is
their movement through different environments
that shapes the way in which the viewer receives
them as art objects, reproductions, or some
liminal space in between.
Notes
I am deeply ingratiated to Dr. Kristin Schwain of the University of Missouri for her advice and many suggestions
while developing this essay. This research would not have been possible without the opportunity provided by the
Summer Institute in Museum Anthropology of the National Museum of Natural History under the direction
of Dr. Candace Greene and by Dr. Nancy Parezo of the University of Arizona, to whom I am indebted for her
guidance and thoughts regarding this topic.
1. “Authenticity” is a 20th-century word that is often imposed on art of the past, further complicating developing
notions of imitation. This term, in its division between the real and unreal, relates to aesthetics. I will examine
authenticity’s transformation in conjunction with plaster casts from the 19th century, during which imitation
was heralded, to the 20th century, when authenticity became the primary criterion for judging plaster casts. The
shift in taste began in the early decades of the 20th century as a response to consumer culture and as an attempt
to push art beyond mere copying. This, however, was not a smooth transition, as will be noted in the complexity
of the discussion of plaster cast collections. For a more detailed elucidation of this term and its implications, see
Orvell (1989). Lears also discusses more broadly how anti-modernism incited a search for the authentic at the
turn of the century (Lears 1981).
2. Robert Rydell, historian and extensive researcher of world fairs, provides further information on the connections
between world fairs and museums (Rydell 2006).
3. See Rydell (1984) and Harris (1990: 111-31) for further information on world fairs as didactic and nationalistic
sites.
4. Gerber was awarded gold and silver medals by the state in 1883 and 1902. In fact, in 1917, the College Art
Association of America published a report on reproductions for the college museum and art gallery in which they
postulated that August Gerber was “the best cast-maker and worth all the others put together” (Robinson 1917:
16). Thus, Gerber’s status was secure outside of Germany as well.
5. This reconstruction had been challenged by scholarship briefly during Furtwängler’s lifetime, but more extensively
in the 20th century (Hartswick 1998).
6. This was not the only exhibition where Gerber demonstrated concern with colour. In a bulletin for the Pennsylvania
Museum, colour is noted, along with texture, as the distinguishing element that made Gerber’s casts so accurate
(Barber 1905: 85).
7. The plaster casts of indigenous sculptures were acquired from museum sources, namely the Peabody Museum in
Cambridge, and thus illustrate high-quality reproductions (SIA, RU 70, box 79, folder 1, Report of the Department
of Anthropology, 1905 by Holmes).
8. The common practice of displaying plaster casts and materials side by side is noted in several museums, including
the Fitzwilliam, which at its beginnings displayed plaster casts and materials from Fiji side by side (Beard 1993:
5). Like the USNM, the Auckland War Memorial Museum in New Zealand exhibited indigenous, Māori objects
in direct relation to European plaster casts in order to invoke a comparison. According to a 1913 guide, the guests
were invited to not only learn about Māori culture, but were also to pay homage to the genius of the people group
whose carvings rivalled even the picture-writings of Egypt. The inclusion of plaster casts and the indigenous roots
of New Zealand were reflective of and as important as these ancient cultures. This would suggest that the plaster
casts actually worked to promote the status of the Māori objects as works of art (Cooke 2010: 585-90).
9. The plaster casts displayed by the USNM were acquired from major cast makers from around the world. For
example, they went straight to museum cast makers such as D. Brucciani of the British Museum, Eugene Arrondelle
of the Louvre, the prominent American cast makers P. P. Caproni & Bro., and the American School of Classical
Studies in Rome, thus ensuring “original casts.” Furthermore, plaster casts that were acquired, but not exhibited,
are important for indicating that there was a degree of selectivity in what was exhibited in this exhibit, suggesting
that the plaster casts needed to have a certain monumental presence. This was the case with a set of eleven casts
of Arretine wares was given by the MFA as a gift but not displayed (MSC, accession no. 42371; Catalogue card
229701-11).
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 145
10.The department contacted P. P. Caproni & Bro. regarding the column and they wrote back stating that they were
unaware of any existing moulds (SIA, RU 70, box 62, folder 16, Holmes to True). This is interesting because at the
time the South Kensington Museum had been in possession of a plaster cast of the Column of Trajan since 1864,
so clearly moulds did exist (Bilbey and Trusted 2010: 473-75). Perhaps the Goddess of Liberty, an allegorical symbol
of American democracy, was meant to evoke a comparison with the indigenous traditions of empire building.
11.It should be noted that plaster casts were not only being removed from museums, but also other institutions. Art
academies also encouraged their removal beginning after the Second World War. This was spurred by the thought
that plaster casts were symbols of academicism and not of creative authenticity (Bury 1991: 123). Art academies
also began to place a greater emphasis on life-drawing and painting over sculpture (Wallach 1998: 55).
12.Paul DiMaggio thoroughly discusses this emerging distinction of the institutionalization of high culture and
sacrilization of art taking place from 1880-1910 in his essay “Cultural Entrepreneurship in 19th-Century Boston:
The Creation for an Organizational Base for High Culture in America.”
13.Walter Benjamin championed this idea of the loss of the aura of a mechanically produced object in his 1936 essay
“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.”
14.See McClellan (2003) and DiMaggio (1982).
15.Historian Lawrence Levine proposes such a pluralistic approach to culture of this period stating that “worthy,
enduring culture is not the possession of any single group or genre or period, who conceive of culture as neither finite
nor fixed but dynamic and expansive” (Levine 1988: 255). Similarly, Michael Leja advocates the acknowledgement
of the existence of both academicism and modernism at the turn of the century in America and the opportunities
these offered the viewer (Leja 1996).
16.This was a standard practice of Gerber. In a 1905 Philadelphia Museum Bulletin, Gerber is also recorded as having
physically been present at the time of the installation of his casts (Barber 1905: 85).
17.The Horace Smith Collection of Plaster Casts at the George Walter Vincent Smith Art Museum in Springfield,
Massachusetts, was restored in 1978 after having been in storage for years (Haskell 2002: 16). One of the most
prominent examples of cast revival during the 1980s was that of the Cast Courts at the Victoria & Albert Museum
(Bury 1991: 124). A more recent example is the 2003 revival of plaster casts at University of California, Berkeley,
some of which were present at the 1915 Panama Pacific International Exposition (Miller 2005).
References
Primary Sources
Museum Support Center (MSC), Suitland, MD.
National Anthropological Archives (NAA), Suitland, MD. Smithsonian Institution Archives (SIA), Washington,
DC.
Southeast Missouri State University (SEMO). University Photographs Collection. Special Collections and
Archives.
Secondary Sources
Bahlsen, L. 1904. German Educational Exhibition: World’s Fair St. Louis 1904: Elementary and Advanced Education.
Berlin: W. Büxenstein.
Barber, Edwin. 1905. Notes. Bulletin of Pennsylvania Museum 3 (12): 85-86.
Beard, Mary. 1993. Casts and Cast-Offs: The Origins of the Museum of Classical Archaeology. Proceedings of the
Cambridge Philological Society 39:1-29.
Bilbey, Diane and Marjorie Trusted. 2010. The Question of Casts: Collecting and Later Reassessment of the Cast
Collections at South Kensington. In Plaster casts: Making, Collecting, and Displaying from Classical Antiquity to the
Present, ed. Rune Frederiksen and Eckart Marchand, 465-83. New York: De Gruyter.
Bury, Michael. 1991. Introduction. Journal of the History of Collections 3:121-24.
Camille, Michael. 1996. Rethinking the Canon: Prophets, Canons, and Promising Monsters. Art Bulletin
78:198-202.
Cape Girardeau Democrat. 1904. Houck the Man Who Purchased the Statuary, The “Unknown Friend” Who Did
the Handsome Thing. December 24.
Casanowicz, Immanuel. 1924. Old World Archaeology. In Annual Report of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian
Institution showing the Operations, Expenditures, and Condition of the Institution for the Year Ending in June 30, 1922,
416-98. Washington: Government Printing Office.
146 Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)
Cooke, Ian. 2010. Colonial Contexts: the changing meanings of the cast collection of the Auckland War Memorial
Museum. In Plaster casts: Making, Collecting, and Displaying from Classical Antiquity to the Present, ed. Rune
Frederiksen and Eckart Marchand, 577-94. New York: De Gruyter.
Crow, Judith. 1975. SEMO Statues Silent, Broken. Southeast Missourian, 14 September, A1.
DiMaggio, Paul. 1982. Cultural Entrepreneurship in 19th-Century Boston: The Creation for an Organizational
Base for High Culture in America. Media, Culture, and Society 4:33-50.
Frederiksen, Rune and Eckart Marchand. 2010. Introduction. In Plaster casts: Making, Collecting, and Displaying
from Classical Antiquity to the Present, ed. Rune Frederiksen and Eckart Marchand, 1-10. New York: De Gruyter.
Gerber, August. 1904. German Educational Exhibit: Classical Sculpture. Cologne: A. Gerber.
———. 1907. Katalog über künstlerische Nachbildungen klassischer Skulpturen aller Kunstepochen. Köln: A. Gerber.
———. 1910. Reproduktionen Klassicher Bildwerke aus der Kunstanstalt August Gerber. Köln: A. Gerber.
Harris, Neil. 1990. Cultural Excursions: Marketing Appetites and Cultural Tastes in Modern America. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Hartswick, Kim. 1998. The Athena Lemnia: A Response. In Stephanos: Studies in Honor of Brunilde Sismondo
Ridgway, ed. Kim Hartswick and Mary Sturgeon, 105-14. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology.
Haskell, Heather. 2002. The Horace Smith Collection of Plaster Casts. Sculpture Review 51:14-17.
Kenworthy-Browne, John. 2006. Plaster Casts from the Crystal Palace, Syndenham. Sculpture Journal 15:173-98.
Lears, T. J. Jackson. 1981. No Place of Grace: Antimodernism and the Transformation of American Culture, 1880-1920.
New York: Pantheon.
Leja, Michael. 1996. Modernism’s Subjects in the United States. College Art Association 55 (2): 65-72.
Levine, Lawrence. 1988. Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Mattingly, Arthur. 1979. Normal to University: A Century of Service. Cape Girardeau: Missourian Litho and
Printing Company.
McClellan, Andrew. 2003. A Brief History of the Art Museum Public. In Art and its Publics: Museum Studies at the
Millennium, ed. Andrew McClellan, 1-49. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
Miller, Stephen, ed. 2005. Plaster Casts at Berkeley: Collections of the Hearst Museum of Anthropology & Department
of Classics at UC Berkeley: An Exhibition of Rare Plaster Casts of Ancient Greek and Roman Sculpture. Berkeley:
Department of Classics, University of California Berkeley.
Nichols, Marden. 2006. Plaster Cast Sculpture: A History of Touch. Archaeological Review from Cambridge
21:114-30.
Orvell, Miles. 1989. The Real Thing: Imitation and Authenticity in American Culture, 1880-1940. Chapel Hill, NC:
University of North Carolina Press.
Parezo, Nancy and Don Fowler. 2007. Anthropology Goes to the Fair: the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Pinney, Christopher. 2004. Photos of the Gods: the Printed Image and Political Struggle in India. London: Reaktion.
Robinson, David. 1917. On Reproductions for the College Museum and Art Gallery. The Bulletin of the College Art
Association of America 1:15-21.
Rydell, Robert. 1984. All the World’s a Fair: Visions of Empire at American International Expositions, 1876-1916.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
———. 2006. World Fairs and Museums. In A Companion to Museum Studies, ed. Sharon Macdonald, 135-51.
Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Southeast State Missouri University. 2007. Historic Statuary Collection to be Displayed at New Alumni Center. http://
www.semo.edu/news/index_14390.htm (accessed October 16, 2010).
Stone, Clayton. 1987. Antique Casts in America. National Sculpture Review 35:26-33.
Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012) 147
Van Rheeden, Herbert. 2001. The rise and fall of the plaster-cast collection at the Hague Academy of Fine Arts
(1920-1960). A personal enterprise of the Dutch dilettante and classicist, Constant Lunsingh Scheurleer (18811941). Journal of the History of Collections 13:215-29.
Wallach, Allan. 1998. Exhibiting Contradictions: Essays on the Art Museum in the United States. Amherst: University
of Massachusetts Press.
Wonders, Karen. 1989. Exhibiting Fauna—From Spectacle to Habitat Group. Curator 32:131-56.
148 Material Culture Review 74-75 (Spring 2012) / Revue de la culture matérielle 74-75 (printemps 2012)